Facts
The non-applicants (wife and two minor children) filed an application under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking maintenance of Rs. 20,000/- per month from the applicant (husband).
Source reference: no citationThe marriage between the applicant and non-applicant No. 1 was solemnized on 18.02.2005.
Source reference: no citationThe wife alleged cruelty, harassment regarding dowry, and stated that the husband, a vegetable seller, earns Rs. 1000-1200/- per day.
Source reference: p.2, para. 2The applicant/husband denied the allegations, claiming the wife left the matrimonial home without sufficient cause and was residing with her parents.
Source reference: p.2, para. 3The Family Court, after considering oral and documentary evidence, including the wife as PW-1 and the husband as DW-1, awarded maintenance of Rs. 5,000/- per month (Rs. 2,000/- to the wife and Rs. 1,500/- each to the children) via an order dated 09.02.2026.
Source reference: p.2, para. 4The present revision petition was filed by the husband against this order.
Source reference: p.2, para. 4Issues
1. Whether the impugned order of maintenance dated 09.02.2026 passed by the Family Court is illegal, arbitrary, or contrary to settled principles of law and procedure.
Source reference: p.3, para. 52. Whether the Family Court erred in granting maintenance despite the wife allegedly leaving the matrimonial home without sufficient cause.
Source reference: p.3, para. 53. Whether the maintenance amount awarded by the Family Court is excessive or unreasonable.
Source reference: p.4, para. 7Law Applied
The court primarily applied Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code concerning the provision for maintenance of wives, children, and parents.
Source reference: no citationIt also considered the discretion of the Family Court in evaluating evidence, the social status of parties, their earning capacity, the number of dependents, and the overall facts and circumstances of the case when determining a maintenance amount.
Source reference: p.4, para. 7Reasoning
The High Court, after reviewing the revision petition, the impugned order, and other appended documents, found that the Family Court had properly considered the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C.
Source reference: p.3, para. 6The Family Court observed that the wife was residing separately for sufficient reasons.
Source reference: p.3, para. 7Upon appreciating the evidence and circumstances, the Family Court awarded Rs. 2,000/- per month to the wife and Rs. 1,500/- each to the minor children until majority, totaling Rs. 5,000/- per month.
Source reference: p.4, para. 7The High Court determined that, considering the parties' social status, earning capacity, and dependents, the awarded maintenance was neither excessive nor unreasonable.
Source reference: p.4, para. 7The court did not find any illegality, perversity, or infirmity in the impugned order, concluding that no ground warranted interference.
Source reference: p.4, para. 7Holding
The High Court dismissed the criminal revision petition, finding it devoid of merit.
The court held that the impugned order of maintenance dated 09.02.2026 passed by the Family Court was not illegal, arbitrary, or infirm and did not warrant any interference.
Source reference: p.4, para. 8The maintenance amount awarded was deemed neither excessive nor unreasonable.
Source reference: p.4, para. 7The Family Court's decision was upheld.
Source reference: no citationOriginal Court PDF
SHYAM PRAKASH MOURYAvsSMT. DOLY MOURYA
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in